9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (9) TMI 314X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal No. 29 to 32/Demand/98, dated 31-3-1998 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara passed in respect of three show cause notices. The three appeals and three stay applications have been filed as three show cause notices had been issued to them. 2. On behalf of the applicant, Shri V. Sridharan, learned Counsel submitted that the demand of duty has been raised on certain supplies of Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) made by the applicant to their customer, M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) in tankers on which applicant paid duty based on the price fixed by the Oil Pricing Committee applicable for LPG supplied by BPCL to their customers in different modes of supply. He stated that while supply by the applicant to B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the sole consideration for the supply. It was contended by the learned counsel that the subsidy received by the applicant from OCC was not liable to be added to the prices actually charged by them to their customers. Another plea advanced by learned counsel was that the price for LPG supplied in different modes was the administered price fixed by the OCC and this cannot be treated as the price or the maximum price fixed under any Law [within the meaning of Proviso (ii) to Section 4(1)(a)]. He also contended that even such administered prices are applicable to the Oil Companies who market the Petroleum products and not applicable to the applicant who sells LPG to the Oil Companies to do the marketing. He referred to the Supreme Court judgm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to the Oil Companies who market the Petroleum products but also to others like the applicant. 5. He pointed out that the plea of limitation raised on behalf of the applicant is only in respect of the first notice dated 2-3-1998 covering the period March, 1994 to July, 1997. The other notices have been issued in time. Limitation is not applicable as there was suppression due to non-disclosure of the mode of clearance of LPG. 6. The submissions have been considered. A similar stay matter has been decided by us vide Stay Order 114-115/98-A, dated 22-4-1998 in the case of Indian Oil Corporation in terms of which we had ordered pre-deposit approximately 25% of the amount demanded as duty. In that case we had taken note of an earlier decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
